Answers to questions on dam right in front of us

Friday

Dec 13, 2013 at 2:00 AM

On Dec. 2 the Board of Selectmen were suppose to decide whether to put the question of the Great Dam to the voters this upcoming March. This was what the citizens who attended the prior selectmen's meeting were told.

Brian Griset

On Dec. 2 the Board of Selectmen were suppose to decide whether to put the question of the Great Dam to the voters this upcoming March. This was what the citizens who attended the prior selectmen's meeting were told.

The crowded room of citizens voiced their concerns, testified to their desires and then waited for the decision. Whether to put the number one rated alternative, dam removal and river restoration, on the March ballot and qualify for the 75 percent federal funding.

Instead three of the selectmen, Dan Chartrand, Julie Gilman and Matt Quandt stated they still had questions.

This after nine years of study, hundreds of thousands of dollars in scientific studies, a thousand pages of documents, analysis and costs estimates. An hour-long presentation by the River Study Committee, NHDES and NOAA officials. They still had questions?

From the six questions raised by Selectman Chartrand, I can only conclude he hasn't read "the study." Here are the answers to Mr. Chartrand's questions. Page numbers also to look them up.

Question/Statement 1: "Need answer on Mill water issue."

Please refer to Page 14 of the Executive Summary (ES). Conservative high and low estimates have been established. The only question is what engineering solution will be settled upon. We don't need that answer now.

These costs are already included in the final report and addressed. "These totals include the amount not only for construction, but also for mitigating potential impacts such as the cost to retrofit publicly-owned water intakes at the Exeter River Pumping Station and the fire hydrants at the Exeter Library and Founders Park," (Pgs. 13-14 ES).

Question 3: "Concerned loss of wetlands." There is a whole section and separate study on environmental impacts. Essentially the positives far outweigh the negatives and any "loss" of wetlands is minimal. Here are some comments beginning at Page 247 of the full report.

"Removing the dam would benefit floodplain forest and its wildlife, with restored natural flow and seasonal flood patterns. The dam currently restricts the natural flooding potential and alters the natural community type," Pg. 247.

"In summary, it is expected that the overall effects of this alternative on wildlife would be minor and would be offset by the benefits of restoring upstream migration to anadromous fish species," Pg. 247.

Wetlands: "The majority of potentially affected wetland is classified as Palustrine forested (PFO) areas along the banks of the river, with scrub-shrub and aquatic bed/emergent marsh areas also present."

"Only at the very margins of the forested systems is there any potential loss of wetland acreage as marginal areas may be converted to upland."

"However, these changes would likely occur over ecological time and would not likely be readily detectable for years to decades in the future," Pg. 254.

"Loss of wetlands at the margin would likely be at least partially offset by the development of new riparian aquatic bed, emergent, and scrub-shrub systems within the Exeter River channel."

"Additionally, it is expected that new beaver activity would occur in wetlands adjacent to the river which is likely to offset some of these wetland shifts," Pg. 254.

Refer to the wetlands section of the full report. There is a map which shows not only these two roads are not affected, the undeveloped area off Crawford Avenue would not have affected wetlands. Zoning plays a much more important role on these two streets than any potential changes caused by dam removal.

Question 5: "Water supply if the ground water treatment plant is not on-line."

The answer to this question is to talk directly with the consultants. Since the River Pump Station upgrade is included in the river restoration alternative, we would remain on surface water (like we are now) until the GWTP is on line.

Question 6: "Cultural/Historic concerns."

This is a subjective issue. What part of history are you protecting? I love Exeter's history, but this issue is addressed with 181 pages of the first part of a Sec 106 Review. See "Appendix L", beginning at Appendices' Page 211.

"Consideration and review of these impacts has begun with the initiation of the Section 106 review of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA)," Pg. 213.

"Once the Town determines whether or not to remove the dam, the Section 106 process would continue with these additional investigations and subsequent consultation regarding effects," Pg. 214.

So, we can't continue that process until you make a decision. So, put it on the ballot Dan, Julie, Matt. Or, we the citizens will.

Advertise

Original content available for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons license, except where noted.
seacoastonline.com ~ 111 New Hampshire Ave., Portsmouth, NH 03801 ~ Privacy Policy ~ Terms Of Service